A radar lock on Chinagate

By Charles Smith

The American bombs that fell on the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade were
guided to the wrong target by U.S. satellites. President Clinton claims
the bombing was an accident. The Clinton excuse for the embassy bombing
is an outdated satellite map of downtown Belgrade. The Chinese
government is rightly skeptical of the “accidental” bombing.

Ironically, the Chinese army is all too familiar with U.S. satellite
technology. According to a 1997 Commerce Department report, the Clinton
administration gave the Chinese “fine images
of rural China and Beijing as well as Siberian port cities, Seoul and
Kadena Air Force Base on Okinawa.”

In 1997, U.S. Commerce Department officials at the American Embassy
in Beijing wrote that the Chinese obtained satellite images in order to
“help demonstrate that Tibet has enough arable land to feed itself.”

The heartfelt concern for Tibet by the communist government is a
touching piece of propaganda. However, the Chinese were not the only
ones seeking high-resolution U.S. space photographs.

According to the same 1997 document, Commerce officials “were told
that two North Koreans visited the station some time ago but did not buy
any (satellite) imagery. The North Koreans do
not have any significant earth resources satellite utilization
capability.”

Commerce documents shows the Chinese “remote Sensing Center” was
supplied with “world class remote sensing data acquisition, processing,
archive and distribution” equipment. The state-of-the-art satellite
equipment was provided by Hughes Corp. In 1995, the Hughes Corp. CEO was
million-dollar DNC donor Michael Armstrong.

The U.S. space images were obtained from the satellite “remote
sensing” station operated by a Chinese Army unit — the Commission on
Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense (COSTIND). In
1995, COSTIND was led by PLA Gen. Ding Henggao. Ding, a close friend of
U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry, led several so-called “commercial”
ventures with the Commerce Department to obtain advanced U.S. technology
for the Chinese army, including the joint Hughes-PLA remote sensing
venture.

Clearly, the war to dominate Earth starts in space. The modern space
war includes satellites for highly accurate navigation and bombing. For
example, the bombs that struck the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade were
directed to the target using the GPS (Global Positioning System)
satellite navigation system.

In 1995, the Clinton administration approved the sale of the very
same bombing/navigation technology directly to a company owned by the
Chinese Air Force. The sale included a complete
manufacturing facility and training for the Chinese workers.

According to a 1997 report forced from the U.S. Commerce Department
by a federal lawsuit, “The most troubling potential transfer to China is
Rockwell’s proposed joint venture deal with the Shanghai Broadcast
Equipment Factory and the Shanghai Avionics Corporation, the latter of
which is a key enterprise of the Aviation Industries of China.”

“Rockwell Collins Navigation and Communications Equipment Company,
Ltd.,” states the 1997 report, “will design, develop, and build Global
Positioning System (GPS) navigation receivers
systems for the Chinese market.”

“These components have serious dual-use applications, since the
acquisition of reliable GPS data can enhance, to varying degrees, the
capacity of militaries to field highly accurate cruise and
ballistic missiles, such as those used to intimidate Taiwan during March
1996.”

Clearly, Clinton officials were aware of the military effects of the
Rockwell-Shanghai venture. Furthermore, the Clinton administration also
knew the geo-political impact of the GPS military sale to the Chinese
Air Force. For example, the report noted the diplomatic effects on
Taiwan of the GPS sale.

“More accurate GPS systems would enhance the PLA’s ability to carry
out attacks against Taiwan’s military and industrial facilities,” states
the report. “Potentially reducing the ability of the Taiwanese military
to defend itself against PRC coercive diplomacy.”

However, the most chilling conclusion was reserved for the effects on
U.S. military forces, especially U.S. naval forces.

“The use of GPS to enhance the accuracy of long-range Chinese cruise
missiles, coupled with long-range sensors, would raise serious concerns
for the U.S. Seventh Fleet in the Pacific, and
possibly circumscribe their ability to provide an effective deterrent in
a crisis over Taiwan.”

Furthermore, the Chinese may have obtained the “long-range sensors”
from the Clinton administration as well. Another Commerce document shows
that in 1996, Loral Defense
Systems (then an arm of Loral Aerospace) actively solicited Commerce
Secretary Brown to intervene in getting approval from the White House to
sell advanced radar technology to China.

Loral wanted very badly to sell Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) to
China. SAR is a sophisticated ground-looking radar essential to the
newly deployed Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar
System (JSTARS) used by the U.S. military to track ground-based
vehicular movement on the battlefield. SAR radars also equip the USAF
F-15 Strike Eagle and the Predator unmanned aerial
reconnaissance vehicle.

A letter discovered in the previously unreleased files of Ron Brown
shows that Loral Defense Systems president, Jerald A. Lindfelt, wrote
Brown in March of 1996. Lindfelt sought Brown’s
help in the export of SAR technology to the Beijing Institute of Remote
Sensing. According to the Defense Department, the Chinese “Institute of
Remote Sensing” is actually a front for
the Chinese army missile guidance design laboratories. The Institute of
Remote Sensing is “a developer of precision guidance systems for
surface-to-air missiles.”

Loral’s 1996 appeal also included a direct request for Ron Brown to
overrule the Department of Defense, the State Department and even
Brown’s own Commerce Department, which had all previously denied SAR
radar exports to China.

“We’ve worked hard trying to resolve these problems with the
Department of State, the Department of Commerce and the Defense
Technology Security Administration (DTSA),” Loral’s Lindfelt wrote to
Brown.

“But someone in these organizations always manages to block our
participation … Over the years we have found that this type of
obstacle often comes from lower levels of management rather than by
people willing to look at the bigger picture. Could you help us by
identifying someone in the Commerce Department high enough in the
organization to help us resolve these issues and open this marketplace.
…”

Bill Clinton’s help to our “strategic partner” includes the one item
that pro-Communist China pundits claim the Chinese military needs the
most — real training. The Chinese are currently
participating in joint training exercises with the U.S. military.

For example, in 1998, the USAF staged a series of air to air
exercises in Alaska called “COPE THUNDER.” The USAF air war games
included an entire class of officers from the Chinese
People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) Air War college and several
other high level PLAAF observers.

The Clinton training of the Chinese military continues as planned
despite diplomatic setbacks over the embassy bombing. In the fall of
1999, another class of PLAAF air war cadets is scheduled to be trained
by the USAF in Alaska. The military training will help the Chinese Air
Force officers understand and effectively employ their newly acquired
American bombing and
radar systems.

It is doubtful that Chinese military planners will miss the U.S.
embassy in downtown Seoul with their (made-in-the-U.S.A.) improved
missile technology. However, it is certain the Chinese
military did not buy high-resolution satellite photos of Okinawa in
order to help PLAAF cadets find the Kadena U.S. Air Force Base Officers
Club.


Related items:


Charles Smith

Charles R. Smith is a noted investigative journalist. For over 20 years, Smith has covered areas of national security and information warfare. He frequently appears on national television for the Fox network and is a popular guest on radio shows all over America. Read more of Charles Smith's articles here.